Are We Just One Justice Away from Losing Our 2nd Amendment Rights?

Your 2nd amendment rights could be just one justice away from being taken away. We came across an article written by Tony Sheda of the News Tribune and thought it brought up some interesting points worth considering. Check it out below and leave a comment to let us know what you think.

In Supreme Court rulings in recent years, gun-control laws have been defeated, but via precarious 5-4 votes. That means our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms hinges on a single vote. It means a constitutional right could be taken away by a liberal judge who thinks only certain parts of the Constitution are relevant.

In the News Tribune’s Sunday Opinion section of Dec. 8, a Northland judge, Mark Munger, had a lengthy diatribe published (“Let December tragedies bolster political will to end gun violence”). I felt the commentary showed a disdain for our Constitution. Munger seemed to forget he raised his right hand and swore to uphold the Constitution, not just the parts he likes.

Munger suggested that all gun transactions go through background checks. How? He wrote he has four sons. So let’s say he wants to leave a son a favorite rifle. Should he and his son have to go to a licensed gun dealer, pay a transfer fee and send in a form to the federal government for an “instant” background check (via the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, or NICS) before the gun can be transferred? That’d be assuming his son passes the check. And what if there’s a glitch and a two-week hold is put on the transfer? That sometimes happens. Should his son have to wait on the federal government?

What if such a hold happened to someone in an abusive situation and during the wait he or she was killed? Would that be acceptable to Judge Munger?

In his commentary, Munger referred to the Bushmaster rifle as an assault rifle with “one purpose and one purpose only: combat.” Never mind that millions use rifles like the Bushmaster for self-defense and sport. Yes, many use them for hunting. As Munger wrote about the Bushmaster, one would think it was a Rambo-type, fully-automatic weapon when in reality it is nothing more than a semi-automatic: one pull of the trigger for one shot.

You could call any gun an assault weapon if it is used to assault you. I have a Ruger .22-caliber semiautomatic. If I took the wood stock off and replaced it with a skeleton stock it would meet the definition of an “assault weapon.”

Judge Munger’s column demonized the National Rifle Association, suggesting it wants us to have any type of weapon. That’s gibberish. I am in the NRA. So are my son and my wife. We in the NRA work within the law, but at the same time we work to protect our Second Amendment rights. We are law-abiding Americans who believe in our Constitution. We don’t pick and choose as Judge Munger seems to.

I would hate and would be scared to go before Judge Munger if I was arrested for giving my son my old Marlin 30-30 rifle.

Gun owners and even non-gun people should be afraid that a Judge Munger-type could be appointed for life to the Supreme Court. Such an appointment could turn 5-4 votes in support of our Constitution into 5-4 votes against our Constitution.

Background checks can lead to a gun registry and, in the wrong hands, gun confiscation. This would make criminals of law-abiding gun owners. It has been printed and said NRA members support background checks. Not true. Look it up.

Judges are elected. Remember this when you vote. Just because a judge is an incumbent doesn’t mean he or she is a good, fair judge.

Tony Sheda of Wrenshall is a gun-rights advocate and defender of the Second Amendment.

Comments

What is it about these over educated liberals trying to change the Constitution? In the Bill of Rights our Founding Fathers created the second Amendment. They did not trust the Government they were creating to not try to take away the ability of the people to resist the government and stop it if it was necessary to preserve their freedoms. So many of the people in charge have protection in the form of armed guards, etc so they do not understand what the ordinary individual feels when he or she is scared of what may happen. Mot liberals do not understand that we want to be secure in our lives and not be told what they think is best for them. Too many Judges, attorneys, and politicians have no idea of how the ordinary working or retired person feels. We do not trust them.